Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
...Natural Resources Defense Council senior attorney David Pettit urged city officials to help restart talks between AEG and a coalition of anti-poverty activists challenging special state legislation intended to speed up approval....
...If AEG's special legal protections are nullified by a court challenge, stadium-related lawsuits could continue for two to three years...
I personally would like to see the NFL play more neutral site regular season games. Maybe a Det or Buf game in Toronto, Jags or Bucs game in Orlando, Cowboys or Texans game in San Antonio or Austin, Raiders game in Las Vegas, Cardinals in Albuqurque, one of the midwest teams playing in Des Moines or Lincoln or Omaha. There's numerous possibilities.
Why would Detroit play in Toronto? Buffalo is already doing that.
None of the other scenarios are going to happen. Ever.
non of what was mentioned will work , but try this on for size.
(1) Seattle and Vancouver Canada
(2) Detroit and Hamilton Canada
(3) San Diego and Tijuana Mexico
(4) Denver and Calgary and Edmonton Canada
(5) Minneapolis and Winnipeq Canada
(6) Miami and San Juan P.R.
(7) Phoenix AZ and Tucson AZ
(8) Dallas and Oklahoma City OK
(9) Houston and Monterey Mexico
(10) Atlanta and Birmingham Ala
Cities sharing franchises does not work. Plus are the secondary cities supposed to build NFL stadiums for a couple games a year?
The best expansion process the NFL could do right now is implement something like 8-10 developmental league teams and place them in smaller football hungry markets that could play in ~25K seat stadiums. Just 10 off the top of my head.
OKC
Birmingham
Omaha
SLC
Sacramento
Richmond
Austin
Charleston
Louisville
Little Rock
Would open up a ton of markets and a ton of players to the league without watering down the product or sharing teams.
Because they were the first and can do whatever they like.
j/k
The Pack are owned by shareholders, etc. What the Packers get are paid for by shareholders and fans, and theyre VERY loyal to their team. I think Green Bay only has 90,000 people, but theyd never let their team slip through the cracks, ever. Theyre not like these new expansion teams with fairweather fans, the Packers have history, tradition, pride. Im still convinced that 80% of the other NFL teams dont know what those words even mean. All these booming cities get NFL teams, and that just isnt right IMO. Keep the league smaller, its keeps it more personal and much more competetive. And no more domes!!!! Football is a cold weather sport, not some desert sport or tropical sport. Theres just something wrong with the idea of playing football under palm trees at 80 degrees. Its about playing in the snow, sub zero temps and brutalizing cold.
I agree with the dome part. The Vikings haven't been the same since they moved indoors. I remember watching Bud Grant and his players in short sleeves while the other teams bundled up. What a great home-field advantage. Plus, playing in snow and slop is a lot of fun both to watch and to participate. I hope the new Vikings stadium goes topless.
...Natural Resources Defense Council senior attorney David Pettit urged city officials to help restart talks between AEG and a coalition of anti-poverty activists challenging special state legislation intended to speed up approval....
...If AEG's special legal protections are nullified by a court challenge, stadium-related lawsuits could continue for two to three years...
hey, lawyers need jobs too.
the talk about the NFL return to L.A. is all talk, speculation, i'm not gonna hold my breath
I agree with the dome part. The Vikings haven't been the same since they moved indoors. I remember watching Bud Grant and his players in short sleeves while the other teams bundled up. What a great home-field advantage. Plus, playing in snow and slop is a lot of fun both to watch and to participate. I hope the new Vikings stadium goes topless.
I agree that football is meant to be played outdoors. And Minnesota has lost a massive advantage by playing in a dome. But some teams are thinking about being able to host other events, like the Super Bowl, NCAA Men's Final Four (which I think has no business being played in a football stadium) and conventions, etc.
Given the money crunch a lot of cities and states are facing, teams should build a stadium that makes the most sense financially. People often forget to factor in the total cost of a stadium. While it may take $600 million to build, they need to factor in the total cost to borrow that money. That $600 million price tag is going to have massive debt payments to be made over the years.
Unfortunately I think the NFL needs to start leaving some smaller markets or doing what the some have suggested in playing in secondary markets for part of the season. Other than Greenbay, most smaller markets are just not big enough to support a team anymore. And it's not even a matter of lack of fan popularity more than just a lack of fans themselves, there just not enough of them. For example, Buffalo and Jax are just not large enough to support NFL teams. The fans are as loyal as any other teams but Buffalo as a region is shrinking in population and Jax just has not grown to what was expected. I know Jax fans who love and support their team, but at the end of the day there are only about 1.5 million people in the entire Jax metro area whereas most NFL cities are in metros 2x that size or more. I don't think it would be a bad idea to let these smaller/medium market teams play in nearby markets, for instance Buffalo playing a few games in Toronto, Jax playing a few games in Orlando, Titans playing in Memphis, Panthers playing in Raleigh. It helps keep the teams profitable, increases the fan base, and doesn't strip the original town of their teams. Maybe the Chargers in dispute to get a new stadium now should consider moving to Orange or Riverside Counties right in between SD and LA. Just throwing it out there.
Cities sharing franchises does not work. Plus are the secondary cities supposed to build NFL stadiums for a couple games a year?
The best expansion process the NFL could do right now is implement something like 8-10 developmental league teams and place them in smaller football hungry markets that could play in ~25K seat stadiums. Just 10 off the top of my head.
OKC Birmingham Omaha SLC Sacramento Richmond Austin Charleston Louisville Little Rock
Would open up a ton of markets and a ton of players to the league without watering down the product or sharing teams.
sort of like the NBADL...hum.....( the NFLDL ) that could work but it would have to go "head to head" with the arena football league and I think that it would end up with the short end of the stick..IMHO..
all of the secondary markets already have college stadiums that seat 25,000 to 100,000 fans....
Add these teams to the NFLDL
Tulsa
Tucson
Fresno
Wichita
Columbus
Columbia S.C.
Last edited by Howest2008; 09-19-2012 at 12:37 PM..
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
